L100.L vs. CMB1.L
L100.L (Lyxor FTSE 100 UCITS ETF - Acc) and CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds - L100.L tracks the FTSE AllSh TR GBP while CMB1.L tracks the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, L100.L returned 8.55%/yr vs 16.15%/yr for CMB1.L. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. L100.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CMB1.L.
Performance
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, L100.L achieves a 8.80% return, which is significantly lower than CMB1.L's 15.96% return. Over the past 10 years, L100.L has underperformed CMB1.L with an annualized return of 8.55%, while CMB1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 16.15% annualized return.
L100.L
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 1.06%
- 6M
- 5.47%
- YTD
- 8.80%
- 1Y
- 21.78%
- 3Y*
- 16.43%
- 5Y*
- 12.52%
- 10Y*
- 8.55%
CMB1.L
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- -2.61%
- 6M
- 14.36%
- YTD
- 15.96%
- 1Y
- 32.84%
- 3Y*
- 27.05%
- 5Y*
- 21.15%
- 10Y*
- 16.15%
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
L100.L Lyxor FTSE 100 UCITS ETF - Acc | 8.80% | 25.82% | 9.29% | 7.37% | 4.86% | 17.92% | -11.79% | 17.40% | -9.14% | 12.09% |
CMB1.L iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) | 15.96% | 43.83% | 13.25% | 30.68% | -3.56% | 18.29% | 1.52% | 24.83% | -13.79% | 22.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between L100.L and CMB1.L is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2010 | 0.68 |
The correlation between L100.L and CMB1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
L100.L
CMB1.L
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Communication Services
Industrials
Utilities
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Technology
L100.L
CMB1.L
Consumer Cyclical
L100.L
CMB1.L
Healthcare
L100.L
CMB1.L
Communication Services
L100.L
CMB1.L
Industrials
L100.L
CMB1.L
Utilities
L100.L
CMB1.L
Financial Services
L100.L
CMB1.L
Consumer Defensive
L100.L
CMB1.L
Real Estate
L100.L
CMB1.L
Energy
L100.L
CMB1.L
Basic Materials
L100.L
CMB1.L
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
L100.L vs. CMB1.L — Risk / Return Rank
L100.L
CMB1.L
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor FTSE 100 UCITS ETF - Acc (L100.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| L100.L | CMB1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.37 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.41 | 3.17 | -0.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.80 | 11.26 | -3.46 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum L100.L drawdown since its inception was -43.92%, smaller than the maximum CMB1.L drawdown of -56.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for L100.L and CMB1.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| L100.L | CMB1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.92% | -56.05% | +12.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.00% | -10.32% | +1.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.01% | -15.62% | +2.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.01% | -24.19% | +11.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.64% | -36.61% | +1.97% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.44% | -3.69% | +2.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.16% | -15.16% | +8.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.79% | 2.91% | -0.12% |
Volatility
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Lyxor FTSE 100 UCITS ETF - Acc (L100.L) is 2.94%, while iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) has a volatility of 3.90%. This indicates that L100.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMB1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| L100.L | CMB1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.94% | 3.90% | -0.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.79% | 12.73% | -2.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.34% | 15.21% | -3.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.80% | 17.98% | -5.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.88% | 20.03% | -5.15% |
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
L100.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than CMB1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.
Dividends
L100.L vs. CMB1.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither L100.L nor CMB1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
L100.L and CMB1.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, L100.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
L100.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CMB1.L.
L100.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP, while CMB1.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for L100.L and 0.33% for CMB1.L.
Find the right allocation for L100.L and CMB1.L
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer